Over 20 U.S leading companies from the fortune 500 list, have removed their “Anti-Paper,” go green campaigns from asking consumers to switch to paperless options for billing. This issue exactly fits in with the recent unethical trend of using “Greenwashing,” in achieving company objectives. This case is not any different, as environmental impacts from consuming paper vs, pixels is actually IN FAVOR and more sustainable in consuming paper products.
Company’s give the impression that by using paper for billing that we are “destroying the trees,” when really trees are a renewable source, that for example, in the U.S more trees are being grown per year- than what is being consumed (I bet consumers didn’t know that.)
Of course consumers know that if they choose to go paperless, it will evidently save the company some money from paper, printing and mailing costs. But does the consumer really know the bigger picture… that using paper is not “Saving the trees,” (a common phrase used to encourage consumers to switch) but rather only “Saving Costs,” for the giant corporations?
From a few different articles I have read, they bring up some interesting points that in fact, as a consumer I did not know.
Here’s a few points to consider:
1. Paper is made from a renewable energy source, where computers and the data infrastructure centres that supports them comes from finite resources and rare earth materials.
2. Consumer’s also don’t know that there is HUGE environmental impacts from switching from paper to e-media. Disposing of computer e-waste is a lot more detrimental and adds a lot more to the global waste stream than does paper. In fact, nearly 61.5% of paper products can be recovered and recycled, compared to only 31% of computer products.
3. The claims are in fact working AGAINST the U.S Economy and threatening many U.S Jobs, as a total of 8.4 million jobs depend on the U.S mailing industry (paper production, printing, graphic design, mail distribution.) Again, working against the environment and it’s people.
4. Let’s be frank, although we all think we are making a difference with the environment and get the e-version, most of us need the actual documents for record-keeping purposes. So the bills are being printed out anyways.
I would love to see some company’s be thoroughly transparant with us, and instead of say “Go Green– Go Paperless,” say “Go Paperless– Help Cut Costs.” I would respect a company a hell of a lot more, and probably for the harsh honesty, decide to go paperless.
Would any of those aspects change your mind to receiving an actual bill or e-bill? What are your thoughts?
Personally, I still would receive an E-bill rather than a paper options only due to storage space, and getting a huge influx and accumulation of paper, where I will end up throwing them out anyways. Would love to hear your opinion on the subject. Comment Below!
Sources:
http://eeiplatform.com/13502/20-leading-u-s-companies-remove-go-green-go-paperless-claims/
http://www.twosides.us/US/Go-paperless-Go-Green-Most-consumers-dont-believe-it-Its-time-for-companies-to-quit-saying-it
http://www.investopedia.com/terms/g/greenwashing.asp
Hi Kelly, really great post!
I thought about covering a similar topic since the point you make also puzzles me as well. The fact that trees are a renewable source and the words ‘paper’ and ‘killing trees’ are still synonymous in modern culture is definitely, as you’ve proven, statistically inaccurate. But one thing I thought about while reading your post is that, also looking at the bigger picture, it’s not wholly inaccurate. By using less paper, we might not be saving trees directly, but we could still be playing a part in the greater cause, for example, in saving eco-systems and forests from clear-cutting or future destruction. I know there are still pros and cons to clear-cutting itself.. and it might on the grand scale do more for the economy than I would think right now, but it’s something I thought that might be worth mentioning. – I make a similar case with my post on hybrid vehicles, which don’t actually seem to be making that great of a positive impact on the environment either. Thanks, Kelly!
Hey Michelle!
Would you mind linking me to your blog? Would love to have a look at your post about Hybrid cars and see the case and point you talk about. 🙂
Yes I totally agree, and I would see how cutting down on our footprint would overall be better for the entire eco-system, but if it comes down to choosing between the better of two worses (computer and pixel usage, or cutting down trees– which are replanted and 69% of paper is recycled anyways ) seems like using paper is a lot better for the environment, plus employs a TON of people and helps the economy thrive.
Yes Computer usage may seem like there is no actual waste going in the environment, but the disposal of computer electronics seems to be very bad for our earth.
If you think of it this way— if people are MOST likely going to print off their bills for book keeping purposes anyway, companies SENDING bills– HELPING economy seems like the better option. 🙂 Thoughts?
Hi Kelly, nice post, it’s always good to challenge commonly held views! I think there are a few issues though:
1. Paper can’t be recycled indefinitely, only about 5 times before it becomes garbage: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/21/science/21qna.html
2. Trees can definitely be grown again, but I think a lot of the environmental consequences people are worried about when it comes to forestry is the destruction of old growth forests and ecosystems, which are definitely not renewable in any meaningful sense (maybe over thousands of years they are).
3. Does getting an e-bill instead of a paper bill decrease the lifespan of your computer in any way or make it more likely that you have to dispose of your computer sooner? If not, I’m not sure how your point (2) argues against e-bills specifically.
Anyway, just playing the devil’s advocate here! Great post, very thought provoking 🙂